4.6 Article

Cellular trafficking and degradation of erythropoietin and novel erythropoiesis stimulating protein (NESP)

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 281, 期 4, 页码 2024-2032

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M510493200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL 32262, 5F32 HL 077036] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Erythropoietin (Epo) is essential for the production of mature red blood cells, and recombinant Epo is commonly used to treat anemia, but how Epo is degraded and cleared from the body is not understood. Glycosylation of Epo is required for its in vivo bioactivity, although not for invitro receptor binding or stimulation of Epo-dependent celllines; Epoglycosylation actually reduces the affinity of Epo for the Epo receptor (EpoR). Interestingly, a hyperglycosylated analog of Epo, called novel erythropoiesis-stimulating protein (NESP), has a lower affinity than Epo for the EpoR but has greater in vivo activity and a longer serum half-life than Epo. We hypothesize that a major mechanism for degradation of Epo in the body occurs in cells expressing the Eporeceptor, through receptor-mediated endocytosis of Epo followed by degradation in lysosomes, and therefore investigated the trafficking and degradation of Epo and NESP by EpoR-expressing cells. We show that Epo and NESP are degraded only by cultured cells that express the EpoR, and their receptor binding, dissociation, and trafficking properties determine their rates of intracellular degradation. Epo binds surface EpoR faster than NESP (k(on) approximate to 5.0 x 10(8) M-1 min(-1) versus 1.1 x 10(8) M-1 min(-1)) but dissociates slower (koff = 0.029 min(-1) versus 0.042 min(-1)). Surface-bound Epo and NESP are internalized at the same rate (k(in) = 0.06 min(-1)), and after internalization 60% of each ligand is resecreted intact and 40% degraded. Our kinetic model of Epo and NESP receptor binding, intracellular trafficking, and degradation explains why Epo is degraded faster than NESP at the cellular level.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据